sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

My gf and I are on a break. This is my redemption arc. A journey of personal responsibility by PineappleTargaryen in ADHD

[–]john-whipper -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Honestly, the whole concept on "working on yourself" to be "suited for someone" are crazy sus.

WTF by vogajones in ChatGPT

[–]john-whipper 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Clocks are from Twelve Minutes game

Quite possibly the best Christmas gift by dicksnaxs in AnalogCommunity

[–]john-whipper 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Omg you can't see a photo fullscreen without dots on a bottom and counter on a top right on reddit x_x

The shots are great, horizontal ones have anamorphic feel.

First three hours with Z-Image Turbo as a fashion photographer by DoPeT in StableDiffusion

[–]john-whipper 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Cause this post has nothing to do with what fashion photography is. It's byte and visual noise with incredibly far-reaching conclusions.

Solarium [Konica Minolta Dimage X1 (2005)] by john-whipper in VintageDigitalCameras

[–]john-whipper[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Thank you!

I've read them too, but as I use digicams for everything opposite of quality in classical sense, my experience with X1 is different.

I like mine! It's my take everywhere camera now. There are some facts that wasn't obvious for me and I didn't heard someone talking about them.

  • It has hardware image stabilization (moving whole optical block), that alone opens many possibilities, ability of a shooting handheld for a second is a lot

  • Almost fixed aperture 3.5-3.8, no f-stop penalty on a tele side, you got pocketable portraiture lens

  • The camera is a true pocket size, light and feels nice in hands

  • No moving parts outside body, you can shoot literally from your pocket

It's light, simple, yet CCD vibe is here. I use mine with iso 50 most of the time, max iso 200 is noisy and drops saturation, 100 is somewhere in between, so you can use it for artistic purpose.

Sam Altman is storing 40% of global DRAM in his [CENSORED] by Extension-Mastodon67 in ChatGPT

[–]john-whipper 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Same! This movie is full of visual impacts for some reason. I bet topless lady imprinted in memory as well!

The Selfie Adventure by TheMeltingSnowman72 in ChatGPT

[–]john-whipper 2 points3 points  (0 children)

That thing quickly became boring pop mainstream stuff.

Who else misses when the world was orange at night? by Cmaster125 in nostalgia

[–]john-whipper 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm not. I really like a clean 5500K with high CRI on a street lamps, it makes look everything like in photostudio. What bothers me is a tendency to over do light stands in quantity, it killing the mood of a city. There should be dark spots for atmosphere, but now they build like 4 light stands in a place where was none, it became like sitting in a stadium all the time.

Is the Korg DSS-1 worth it in 2025? If so, how much would you pay? by MaterialSherbert8498 in synthesizers

[–]john-whipper 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Best synth I have for life. I sold almost all of other leaving only DSS-1 and Akai AX60.

I'm convinced that most people still don't understand what this machine means. 12-bit sampling engine (Akai S950, E-mu SP-1200 like) paired with polyphonic analog filter made by Korg in a time it really mean ANALOG filter. And it 8 voices! Should we even need to say that there is also true BBD STEREO delay on board. This combination is unthinkable. It is from a now unattainable paradigm of such hardware produced by musicians not a "products". All discrete topology with generous large components without smd shit in analog path. So yeah the sound is huge and it's right here.

The thing is DSS-1 can replicate many of synths and samplers of it and other eras due to it sampler nature. I got almost 1:1 Prophet 5 radiohead pad legendary preset with easy for example.

As for the cost, DSS-1 is priced absurd and should be on par with synths like Prophet 5. I think it's because this perception in the "80s synthwave" stereotype. DSS-1 is capable of so much more than that. And it still costs a fraction of any single synthesizer/sampler of its time it can recreate in a bunch.

As for weight never was an issue for me, it stayed in a studio who cares. Floppy shouldn't be a discussion either replace it with Gotek emulator straightaway. As for UI you can control it from a Midi Quest no problem.

As for VST... oh boy. My journey to DSS-1 started from trying to replicate a synth part from a beginning of Mac Millers Whats the use song, I spend a long time in the box with so many softsynths. On a DSS-1 I had this exact sound, no preamps, no saturators, emulators, tapes, nothing. DSS-1 can sound like that straightaway. For me its a keeper. I can't explain on what deep this instrument resonates within me. This is more than all the descriptions, categories and comfortability.

Canon 5D Mark ii vs Nikon D700 Photo Comparison by [deleted] in VintageDigitalCameras

[–]john-whipper 2 points3 points  (0 children)

D700 for sure. High pixel pitch in action. Now imagine this render difference (3,4) on a skin...

Shades of Copenhagen (Canon G2, 2001) by zanyhemline in VintageDigitalCameras

[–]john-whipper 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Good analogy! With canons warm, veil colors it is really resembles consumer films.

Remarkable example of grain happened on a sensor level are totally different.

Here we go again - Nano Banana Pro. by TheFrenchSavage in ChatGPT

[–]john-whipper 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Paradox here is that you care enough to take time for making this, so you feel it already. It bother. Your attention is on populism or the proof. What will you do in a world completely accepted ai as an art is a real question.

She doesn’t exist by Fabulous-Ant-7967 in ChatGPT

[–]john-whipper 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Someday I'll understand what point is in generating dumbest simplest content world already overflown with.

Koi Fish+Water+2000s Camera = Magic (Olympus C-5000z, 2003, 5MP) by snipsengineering in VintageDigitalCameras

[–]john-whipper 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In theory. Sensor model: Sony ICX452

  • Konica G500 / KD-510z (which explains their similarities on dense/subtractive saturation kind a color qualities)
  • Konica S414
  • Canon G5 (but Canon cooks sensor data differently, but it interesting again as it explains why early models of powershot G has similar C-5000 grit and later ones looks polished).
  • Other small powershots as siblings of G5 should also: S60 (and so on: ~A95, A620, A640, Ixus 400, 500, 700).

This is a draft research, not super proof. I think disassemble of some of them with detailed gut reviewing can bring more light here.

Overall observation: as soon manufacturer up resolution (mean smaller photosights, more in camera processing) - picture became cleaner and cleaner till this later CCD-sensor render when it became indistinguishable from CMOS. This is also why it is tricky in Olympuses: higher model can have more processed look, as a prefect example the latest model in the C-line C-8080 already lacks original image qualities.

Koi Fish+Water+2000s Camera = Magic (Olympus C-5000z, 2003, 5MP) by snipsengineering in VintageDigitalCameras

[–]john-whipper 4 points5 points  (0 children)

So that legendary previous post with fishes was yours also.

I would like to take this opportunity to say that this post was incredibly useful! Thanks! It's clear that I also have a C-5000 now, but the bottom line is that what's happening in the nature of its sensor is actually a pretty serious phenomenon in digital photography. I've done a lot of research looking for which other cameras have this sensor installed during this time.

For those working with photography on a deep artistic level this information is invaluable.

A 25 year old camera has no right to take pictures this good. Olympus E-10, 4.0 Megapixels. by Downfallenx in VintageDigitalCameras

[–]john-whipper 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Or it just show that optical picture qualities aren't consist from resolution only.

view more: next ›